Commons:Bureaucrats/Requests/Herbythyme

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 Support = 30;  Oppose = 3;  Neutral = 0 - 91%. I think all active bureaucrats have voted here, and expressed to a certain extent their firm support to Herby. However, I still think it's fine for one of us to close this request, given the very high approval rate of the community. This said, thank you for participating - Herbythyme is now a Commons bureaucrat. Patrícia msg 12:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Herbythyme

Vote

Links for Herbythyme: Herbythyme (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

It appears I was away at the time that the announcement was made that maybe more 'crats were needed & I have been giving the matter some real thought since I've been back. giggy's has been around a while & got enough votes so that it will not fail which is good. I'm guessing/hoping that those who do vote here will not really need any introduction to me however my edit count is around 9000 & my deletion count rather over that I think so I guess I know something more about Commons than I did 18 months ago. I am one of the project's active CUs. I have had 'crat rights on Meta so I am aware of the role & how it works. I guess I am fairly active on RfA etc & often close withdrawn ones etc.

One of the issues with Commons is that, while it has a number of 'crats, Commons is often not their "home" wiki - it certainly is mine & I have no plans to change that in the foreseeable future. I feel strongly that tools should only be granted to those who actually use them so I assure you that if I do get support for these rights I will relinquish them if I am inactive. I have let go a number of rights in the past few months because I felt they were inappropriate or I was insufficiently active. One reason I did hand them back was to focus on Commons which I see as my home wiki & I love it here.

If I can help fine, if not there is plenty of work for me to get on with. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  • veldig sterkt  Support i.e. Very strong support. Herby is active and commited to this project, he's a good communicator and is well respected by the community. I'm feel very confident he would make good use of the extra tools. Finn Rindahl 11:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Strong support What more do I need to say? ;) Dammit, Finn! You beat me! Rocket000 11:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Ahonc (talk) 11:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support, I trust this user 100%, thanks for volunteering, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| ∇ 11:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Look, I don't actually buy that more 'crats are needed here. This big announcement (which I missed) was over a delay of how long exactly? Even 2 or 3 days is not a really big deal for a promotion. And most always, when I go to do 'crat work, someone else has already done all that is needed. So I really don't think we need more. But you all should know how highly I think of Herby... I've nominated him for things multiple times (I think I lost track, but go look at his Oversight nom, I think I listed all his nominations there). He is one of my favourite wikimedians, and one of my most respected ones. If he wants to be a 'crat I can't really think of a better candidate. Period. So my support (since he wouldn't let me nom him when we talked about this prior to his self nom.... ;-P ) should be obvious. Everyone really ought to support him, frankly, he's that good... and I'd be quite surprised and disappointed if there were any opposes. ++Lar: t/c 11:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Strong support Herby is the man if you want someone with these tools. If someone is mean to him, he stays calm and civil. --Kanonkas(talk) 12:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --S[1] 12:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Total e completamente  Support. It's true that we don't need hordes of bureaucrats. But it's also true that, with the advent of SUL, and the amount of RfAs steadily increasing, it's appropriate to increase the amount of people with these tools. Herby knows where his towel is, and would not have nominated himself if he felt he couldn't handle it, or wasn't needed. With this and Giggy's fine additions, we'll have a good number of active bureaucrats. Thanks for reacting on the nudge ;). Patrícia msg 12:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral I only support this if you take back your oversight rights!  Support ;) abf /talk to me/ 13:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support →Christian.И 13:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely  Support EugeneZelenko 14:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong  Oppose Incredibly inconsistent in his votes and ideas, here and on meta, which are his two most active wikis. He ran for bureaucrat on meta saying that there were no backlogs, yet frequently opposes people for that very reason. It's the same on here. He seems to think edit count is a good reason to oppose someone, or whether they've been actually actively been doing work. He already has enough jobs and told me himself he wouldn't run, as there was no need (yet more inconsistency). He opposed O for the reason that he didn't think we needed anymore. We have plenty of active bureaucrats here: Patricia, Lar, Eugene, occasionally Jusjih and Bastique and soon (hopefully) Giggy. I also fimly believe he's only passing because of all the other roles he has, no because of any need or because he's a good person to gauge consensus - I believe he's a poor person for the job considering what bad oppose reasons he makes. Just absolutely no way. Majorly talk 15:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • And considering this and Meta are multilingual wikis, I find his speech rather difficult to understand myself at times. I worry about how people who don't speak English as a first language feel. Majorly talk 15:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • English is my second language and I understand Herby perfectly :-) --O (谈 • висчвын) 20:42, 22 May 2008 (GMT)
        • That's nice to know. You are en-4 near native so you probably can understand. Many users have told me he is difficult to understand, and I myself have so on occasion. Majorly talk 21:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Just noticed it seems Herby didn't even bother to inform White Cat about his bot being requested to deadminned. Not that anyone will agree with me, but poor communication with fellow editors makes me wonder if he'll make similar errors again. Majorly talk 11:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Mellow and AGF with me. Have a bigger mop. Cheers, User:Jack Merridew a.k.a. David 15:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Strong support --MichaelMaggs 17:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - Hard working and dedicated. Thanks Herby! - Epousesquecido 18:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I tend to agree with lar, above, there really isn't any great need for more bureaucrats, however, it's something that is difficult to abuse and Herbythyme hasn't demonstrated any serious errors in judgment in my estimation. In that respect, I see no reason not to support him. Bastique demandez 20:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Marcus Cyron 21:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - I believe herby will make an excellent crat + you can never have enough crats :)..--Cometstyles 22:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Epic strong  Support, as 110% trustworthy. giggy (:O) 23:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Agree --Prevert(talk) 23:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Herby will do a fine job, I'm sure. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Muy  Support Rastrojo (D•ES) 13:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • And here we have disagreement with Majorly. I find Herby's thoughts on adminship and other extra buttons to be remarkably coherent and consistent over time, and his comments on nominations largely more helpful than others'. Herby is rather more mellow than some (with exceptions few and far-between), and can certainly be trusted to implement consensus appropriately. Given that he is highly active here, and certainly trustworthy, I see no reason to deny him a request to do more work :)  Support – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Concentration of power causes corruption and abuse. Monobi (talk) 02:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Herby a tout mon soutien. ~Kylu (u|t) 05:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - ~Innvs: 07:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Maxim(talk) 14:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong  Support One of the most thoughtful and kind Wikimedians around. Extremely high level of clue. Dedicated to making Wikimedia projects adhere to core policies. Commons is fortunate that Herby has decided to make Commons his home wiki. As usual there is periods of time when participation by 'crats wanes due to other commitments. Having an experienced user like Herby available to help will be a benefit to the project. Sorry that I missed this Rfb earlier (due to to real world commitment) and for the delay in supporting. ;-) FloNight♥♥♥ 22:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Yonatan talk 23:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly enough, I weakly  Oppose this nomination. Although Herby is trustworthy and all, he advertises his ideas in RFX (see Majorly's examples) but is inconsistent with them; I find that a serious error in judgement. Also, I really don't know how good Herby's skills at gauging consensus are, and is probably only getting many comments in this RFB as a result of popularity. Furthermore, I am also baffled at how the Computer de-adminship was handled; this gives me doubts about Herby's communication skills. Don't get me wrong: I trust and respect Herby; he is one of my favourite Wikimedians (much like lar), but I find myself concurring with Majorly and Monobi in this case. Maybe later when better communication skills are developed and some gauging consensus. O (谈 • висчвын) 02:52, 26 May 2008 (GMT)
  •  Support --Foroa 15:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Kjetil_r 17:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support sure --.snoopy. 20:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - though I do think the matter of White Cat's bot could have been handled better. A note to his enwiki talkpage would probably have produced a solution more satisfactory for all. That said, no one is perfect and I have full confidence in Herby's judgment. WjBscribe 19:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Some questions, as no one else has asked any. Hypothetical situation: say an RFA was at 15/6/0 at the end. The candidates has 300 edits and 3 months experience, plus adminship on another large project. All six opposes cite vague, unhelpful "needs more experience" type opposes. The RfA is at 71%. How would you close it?
  • My personal preference would be to see 80% community support & I certainly would not close one that was close that I had been involved in voting on. Worth saying that I do not find "needs more experience" at all unhelpful in terms of comments.
  • I could have sworn it was 75% cut off point, but maybe I'm wrong. Still I wouldn't want someone to fail at 78% because you closed it, and not someone else. Majorly talk 09:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought 70-80% was at the discretion of the closing 'crat? Certainly I would prefer others to close anything I had been involved in in that bracket (& I would prefer other 'crats to do the same) --Herby talk thyme 09:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to second this notion. Unless the outcome is wildly not in doubt, it is best to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest by not closing something that one participated in. ++Lar: t/c 17:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess it is fair to say personally I'd prefer 80% but as a 'crat I know that below that is ok. The grey area is more below 75% (& there I would ask for other opinions, something I happily do) --Herby talk thyme 10:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • For me 250 meaningful edits would seem a pretty sensible figure though the question has nothing to do with an RfB. Bear in mind on that RfA in full roughly half the voters agreed with my basic position so my views are not unusual.
  • At the beginning of the year I had no plans to seek further rights however since then I have dropped rights & focussed on Commons. It was you yourself who suggested more 'crats were needed not me - I merely gave your posting consideration & decided to stand. The community should support whomever they think most suited for having these rights. I do hope I would be treated the same as "anyone else" in this - people (I hope) take into account experience both of editing & approach - that is what I would wish to be assessed on. --Herby talk thyme 09:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answers. My opinion, being the only negative one, remains the same unfortunately. It's users like yourself who are slowly turning the RfA process into one like English Wikipedia, with frequent opposes based on anything but trust (which is what it's all about in the end). That, plus the double standards you set for yourself and your friends when voting - it's just wrong. You're going to pass this, as you knew very well from the moment you posted it. Please, please reconsider your voting pattern on RfAs. Adminship is not a big deal, especially on a place like Commons. We're supposed to be a happy, friendly community. Posting unhelpful (yes they are unhelpful) opposes on people just because they don't meet your arbitrary edit number standards is enough to put off any potential helper round here. We all rushed to support you - please consider doing the same for other users more. Thanks, and no hard feelings, Majorly talk 09:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship on Commons is not a big Deal? owhere else in the Project it's such a big deal like here! Nowherw else you have so much to do with Personal Law, Image Rights and so on. It's absolute OK to say no, if you belive the candidate can't hlep or isn't as far as he/she must be for being an Admin. To have a head and to use his head is the cause, I gave my vote to Herby without thinking about it longer time. And I'm normaly not so free with my vote for Crats, CUs ans OSs (ok, there's no longer a need to vote for). Marcus Cyron 14:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I'd say Meta is a lot more dangerous - potential to change the front portals, the blacklist, possibly global blocking, title blacklist. I know nothing about any laws, yet somehow *gasp* I'm an admin. Why? Because I'm not going to go on a deletion rampage. Also it's because I have adminship in other places, so have proven I'm trusted. If you don't think the candidate is good, fair enough - come up with a better reason than "doesn't have enough edits" - a good reason is "likely to abuse tools". Most people here voted support without thinking about it. Why? Because it's Herby! I don't know why he even bothered coming here, he should have just gone to a 'crat and asked for it. Anyhow, you are just as bad with your votes on these requests ("No to BOTS!!!", "NO WAY!!!!!" come to mind when I think of your votes), so it's pointless even arguing about it. Majorly talk 14:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please stay Melon. Supporting this RfB because it's Herby makes perfectly sense to me, I'm more sceptical to supporting the other RfB because it's a giggy Finn Rindahl 14:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:O giggy (:O) 23:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stay melon indeed... perhaps the same can be said for Marcus above. Majorly talk 14:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I better say nothing more to this... Marcus Cyron 23:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to say as a closing comment that I appreciate the support of so many. I hope anyone who has concerns with any of my actions will feel free to let me know. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Bureaucrats/Requests/Herbythyme&oldid=66954681"